EVs have less air and noise pollution, emit less GHG
emissions and have lower user costs per km compared to ICEVs, and can also lead
to an increase in the share of renewable energy in a country/jurisdiction 9. EVs are also more efficient than ICEVs because of their electric
powertrain system. In that sense, electrification of transportation sector may decrease the primary energy consumption because
of the increase in the well-to-wheel efficiency of an electric powertrain
system compared to an ICE system 6.
the transportation sector leads to lower
demand for oil products. The electricity needed to fuel the alternative fuel
vehicles may be generated from different
resources. This means that electrifying
the transportation sector reduces the dependency
on oil products and covers the need for oil products with other
resources. So as the primary energy needed for transportation sector can be supplied from different energy sources,
energy supply security and flexibility will increase 6.
Although there is a worldwide
agreement on the need for decreasing the amount of CO2 emission
reduction, the development of low-emission technologies has several barriers. The
most important barrier is the higher cost of low-emission technologies compared
to conventional technologies. Additional to higher cost, EVs also face the
problem of range anxiety for customers meaning the EV owners may not get the
same driving range they could have with an ICEV and need more time and charging
infrastructure compared to the time and
refueling infrastructure needed for ICEVs. This challenge is specifically
important for BEVs.
It is generally accepted that the widespread
deployment of electric vehicles needs fiscal incentives at least in the early
stages of adoption. These fiscal incentives and regulations may be provided in different forms such as purchase
subsidy, emission regulation, and R&D
funds. Countries/jurisdictions all over the
world have established programs to support the purchase of EVs and development
of their charging/refueling infrastructure. But while we have observed an
increase in the adoption of EVs in recent years, there is still a need for carefully
designed policies for promoting further deployment of EVs. These policies
should be presented in different forms
such as financial incentives, support for technological
progress and incentives for charging/refueling infrastructure 10.
cost of EVS compared to ICEVs can’t overcome the challenge of their higher
upfront cost 9.
Allocating incentives for the purchase of
EVs tries to address the higher cost challenge. Developing sufficient charging
and refueling infrastructure is also aimed at addressing the anxiety range
challenge. Other factors such as lack of
knowledge about new technologies may also contribute to slow deployment
of EVs. However, we are not focusing on these social factors in this work as they are
found to be of a lower degree of importance compared to technological issues 15.
important point in the analysis of the
policies for BEVs, PHEVs, and FCVs is
that the effect of support policies for each of these technologies is not
limited to that certain technology and will also affect the deployment of other
technologies. Harrison and Thiel 11 state
that maturity of FCVs may be prohibited if a strong policy for chargeable
electric vehicles is in place.
work, we are reviewing subsidies for both infrastructure and vehicle deployment
for countries/jurisdictions that have incentives for BEVs and PHEVs as well as
FCVs. The incentives considered in this work for deployment of EVs are
purchase subsidies for BEVs, PHEVs, and FCVs. Regarding the charging/refueling
infrastructure, we are reviewing how local/national governments support and
contribute to the development of the charging/refueling infrastructure. A
qualitative analysis is then presented based on the review of the policies.
Review of support policies
There are a considerable number of countries which have
support policies for deployment of EVs and PHEVs,
but in this work, we are considering
countries that have incentives and support policy for both BEVs/PHEVs and FCVs.
The countries/jurisdictions considered in this work are from three geographical
areas: East Asia, Europe, and North America.
countries/jurisdictions investigated in this work are as follows:
East Asia: Japan, Republic
of Korea, China
Europe: Germany, France, the
UK, Norway, Denmark, Sweden
North America: the state of
The government of Japan provides support to
early adopters of FCVs including “Toyota Mirai” and, in the future, Honda FCV
3 million grant per car (approximately 45% the sale cost of the vehicle) 18.
Based on the new subsidy scheme in Japan introduced in 2016, the government set a maximum subsidy of JPY 850,000
for the purchase of BEVs. Based on this
support policy, the purchase incentive for a Nissan Leaf with a 30 kWh battery amounts to JPY 330,000 19.
government also provides subsidies for the construction of HRSs 18.
shows the support for the development of HRSs sponsored by Ministry of Economy,
Trade and Industry for 2017 fiscal year 20.
rate for Japanese Yen in December 6th, 2017 is 1 JPY ~ 0.01 USD